What is M/s. Jt. Jin Electronics I P. Ltd. v. ACIT authority for?

Transfer pricing adjustments are determined solely on the value of the international transaction, not the entire turnover of the assessee at the entity level.

How many judgments cite M/s. Jt. Jin Electronics I P. Ltd. v. ACIT?

32 judgments on BharatTax cite M/s. Jt. Jin Electronics I P. Ltd. v. ACIT (36 SOT 227), spanning 2015 to 2025.

M/s. Jt. Jin Electronics I P. Ltd. v. ACIT (36 SOT 227)

Huawei Telecommunications (India) Company Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Circle- 2(1), Gurgaon

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 8260/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year: 2014-15 Huawei Telecommunications Vs. Dcit, (India) Company Pvt. Ltd., Circle 2(1), 7Th Floor, Tower-A, Spaze-1- Gurgaon Tech Park, Sohna Road, (Haryana) Gurgaon, Haryana Pin: 122 001 Aabch1376E (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: S/Shri Deepak Chopra and AnkurFor Respondent: Shri Dharm Veer Singh, CIT (DR)

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144C(1)Section 92CSection 92C(3)

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “I”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI M BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VIMAL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2014-15 Huawei Telecommunications Vs. DCIT, (India) Company Pvt. Ltd., Circle 2(1), 7th Floor, Tower-A, Spaze-1- Gurgaon Tech Park, Sohna Road, (Haryana) Gurgaon, Haryana PIN: 122 001 AABCH1376E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: S/Shri Deepak Chopra and Ankur Goyal, Advs. (Virtual) Department by: Shri Dharm Veer Singh, CIT (DR) Date of Hearing: 31.07.2025 Date of pronouncement: 10.10.2025 O R D E R PER VIMAL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER: The assessee’s appe…

Frost & Sullivan (India) P.Ltd, Chennai vs. DCIT (OSD) 8(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1124/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 May 2022AY 2009-10

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 40

…ounsel relied on the provisions of the Rule 10B(1)(e) and also various judicial pronouncements on the subject i.e. (i) Emerson process Management India (P.) Ltd. ITA NO. 8118/m/2010; (II) T Two International P Ltd. and others; IL Jin electronics (I) (P.) Ltd. 36 SOT 227 Del; Starlite case 2010-TII-28-ITAT-DEL-TP; Abhishek Auto Industries Ltd. 2010-TII-54-ITAT-DEL-TP etc. 46. We have heard the parties and perused the relevant provisions of the said rule. Sub clause (i) and (ii) of the Rule 10B(1)(e) referred to the expressions 'in relation to' and the 'relevant base'. They read as follows: (i) The net profit mar…

M/S Adc India Communications Limited, Bangalore vs. Asst.C.I.T., Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal preferred by the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 79/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Apr 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm It(Tp)A No.41/Bang/2016 : Asst.Year 2011-2012 The Assistant Commissioner Of M/S.Adc India Income-Tax, Circle 1(1)(1) Communications Limited, V. Bangalore. 485/8A & 8B, 14Th Cross, 4Th Phase, P.B.No.8512, Peenya Industrial Area Bangalore – 560 058. Pan : Aaack6553H. (Appellant) (Respondent) It(Tp)A No.79/Bang/2016 : Asst.Year 2011-2012 M/S.Adc India Communications The Assistant Commissioner Limited, 485/8A & 8B, 14Th Cross, Of Income-Tax, Circle 1(1)(1) V. 4Th Phase, P.B.No.8512, Peenya Bangalore. Industrial Area Bangalore – 560 058. (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue By : Sri.Rajesh Kumar Jha, Cit-Dr Assessee By : Sri.Aliasagar Rampurawala, Ca Date Of Pronouncement : 29.04.2022 Date Of Hearing : 13.04.2022

For Appellant: Sri.Aliasagar Rampurawala, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Rajesh Kumar Jha, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 40Section 40A(7)Section 9

…egment) 13. It was submitted by the learned AR that the TP adjustment should be restricted to the value of the international transaction. The learned AR relies on the following judicial pronouncements:- (i) Jin Electronics I P Ltd. v. ACIT reported in (2010) 36 SOT 227 (Delhi) (ii) Kirloskar Toyota Textile Machinery P. Ltd. to ACIT in IT(TP)A No.1401/Bang/2010 (order dated 14.11.2014) (iii) CIT v. Phoenix Mecano India P Ltd. (ITA No.1182 of 2014 – judgment dated 07.06.2017) (iv) CIT v. Thyssen Krupp Industries India P. Ltd. 13.1 We have heard rival submissions and perused the material on record. The above judic…

Asst.C.I.T., Bangalore vs. M/S Adc India Communications Ltd., Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal preferred by the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 41/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Apr 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm It(Tp)A No.41/Bang/2016 : Asst.Year 2011-2012 The Assistant Commissioner Of M/S.Adc India Income-Tax, Circle 1(1)(1) Communications Limited, V. Bangalore. 485/8A & 8B, 14Th Cross, 4Th Phase, P.B.No.8512, Peenya Industrial Area Bangalore – 560 058. Pan : Aaack6553H. (Appellant) (Respondent) It(Tp)A No.79/Bang/2016 : Asst.Year 2011-2012 M/S.Adc India Communications The Assistant Commissioner Limited, 485/8A & 8B, 14Th Cross, Of Income-Tax, Circle 1(1)(1) V. 4Th Phase, P.B.No.8512, Peenya Bangalore. Industrial Area Bangalore – 560 058. (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue By : Sri.Rajesh Kumar Jha, Cit-Dr Assessee By : Sri.Aliasagar Rampurawala, Ca Date Of Pronouncement : 29.04.2022 Date Of Hearing : 13.04.2022

For Appellant: Sri.Aliasagar Rampurawala, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Rajesh Kumar Jha, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 40Section 40A(7)Section 9

…egment) 13. It was submitted by the learned AR that the TP adjustment should be restricted to the value of the international transaction. The learned AR relies on the following judicial pronouncements:- (i) Jin Electronics I P Ltd. v. ACIT reported in (2010) 36 SOT 227 (Delhi) (ii) Kirloskar Toyota Textile Machinery P. Ltd. to ACIT in IT(TP)A No.1401/Bang/2010 (order dated 14.11.2014) (iii) CIT v. Phoenix Mecano India P Ltd. (ITA No.1182 of 2014 – judgment dated 07.06.2017) (iv) CIT v. Thyssen Krupp Industries India P. Ltd. 13.1 We have heard rival submissions and perused the material on record. The above judic…

M/S Continental Automotive Components India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-2(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 129/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Mar 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B. R. Baskaranassessment Year :2014-15 M/S. Continental Automotive Vs. Dcit, Components India Pvt. Ltd., Circle – 2(1)(1), Plot No.53B, Bommasandra Industrial Bengaluru. Area, Hosur Road, Attibele Hobli, Anekal Taluk, Bengaluru–560 099. Pan : Aakcs 9578 C Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. T. Suryanarayana, Senior Advocate Revenue By : Shri. Mudavathu Harish Chandra Naik, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 21.03.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.03.2022 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri. T. Suryanarayana, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Mudavathu Harish Chandra Naik, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 143(3)Section 92

…adjustment including the non-AE transactions is erroneous and contrary to the provisions of the Act.Reliance was placed on the following decisions in support of the above contention of the Assessee:  IL Jin Electronics (I) (P.) Ltd v. ACIT reported in[2010] 36 SOT 227 (DELHI)  M/s Tupperware India Private Limited (ITA No. 2140/Del/2011 and 1323/Del/2012) Continental Automotive Components India Pvt.Ltd. Page 47 of 97  IKA India Private Limited v. ACIT reported in [2019] 101 taxmann.com 276 (Bangalore).  CIT v. Alstom Projects India Limited reported in [2017] 88 taxmann.com 465 (Bombay)  Alstom Projects Indi…

M/S Continental Automotive Components India Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-2(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 713/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Nov 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Shri T. Suryanarayana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 92C

…djustment including the non-AE transactions is erroneous and contrary to the provisions of the Act. Reliance is placed on the following decisions in support of the above contention of the Appellant: • IL Jin Electronics (I) (P.) Ltd v. ACIT reported in [2010] 36 SOT 227 (DELHI) • M/s Tupperware India Private Limited (ITA No. 2140/Del/2011 and 1323/Del/2012) • IKA India Private Limited v. ACIT reported in [2019] 101 taxmann.com 276 (Bangalore). • CIT v. Alstom Projects India Limited reported in [2017] 88 taxmann.com 465 (Bombay) • Alstom Projects India Limited v. CIT reported in [2013] 36 taxmann.com 130 (Mumbai -…

Asst CIT 15(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Iot Design & Engineering Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 63/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Jun 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri G. Manjunathaiot Design & Engineering Vs. Dcit-10(3) Limited Aaykar Bhawan, M.K.Road Plot No.Y2, Ceat Tyre Road, Mumbai-400 020 Near Nahur Railway Station, Bhandup(W) Mumbai-400 078

Section 143(3)Section 144C(1)

…rashi Motors India Ltd vs ACIT 2013] 36 taxmann.com 389 (Chennai - Trib.) DCIT vs Invensys India Pvt. Ltd ITA Nos. 1858, 1859 & 2214/Del/ 2011 Invensys India Pvt. Ltd vs DCIT ITANos. 1858, 1859/Del/2011 [2010] IL Jin Electronics (I) (P.) Ltd v. ACIT [2010] 36 SOT 227 (DELHI) - ITAT 46. We have heard both the parties, perused the material available on record and gone through orders of the authorities below. We find that the Ld.DRP has directed the TPO to limit the adjustment only to the AE transactions by following the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High court, in the case of Ratilal Becharlal & Sons vs CIT(2016)…

Iot Design & Engineering Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 10(3), Mumbai

ITA 4722/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Jun 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri G. Manjunathaiot Design & Engineering Vs. Dcit-10(3) Limited Aaykar Bhawan, M.K.Road Plot No.Y2, Ceat Tyre Road, Mumbai-400 020 Near Nahur Railway Station, Bhandup(W) Mumbai-400 078

Section 143(3)Section 144C(1)

…rashi Motors India Ltd vs ACIT 2013] 36 taxmann.com 389 (Chennai - Trib.) DCIT vs Invensys India Pvt. Ltd ITA Nos. 1858, 1859 & 2214/Del/ 2011 Invensys India Pvt. Ltd vs DCIT ITANos. 1858, 1859/Del/2011 [2010] IL Jin Electronics (I) (P.) Ltd v. ACIT [2010] 36 SOT 227 (DELHI) - ITAT 46. We have heard both the parties, perused the material available on record and gone through orders of the authorities below. We find that the Ld.DRP has directed the TPO to limit the adjustment only to the AE transactions by following the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High court, in the case of Ratilal Becharlal & Sons vs CIT(2016)…